What happened to the 'AM I a Victim? thread?

[SixtyFootDoll]

?

Spacehopper5

How exactly do you think SS can find out which allegations are unfounded and which are not, without doing some investigation? I didn't read the blog and have no interest in it but the fact is that SS are not psychic and they have to follow up serious allegations, and sometimes visiting the family is the only way to do that! I have two friends who have been subject to malicious allegations, one was not visited as SS ruled out risk by contacting the school - but in the other case a home visit was the only way to do so. They closed the case, job done. My friend took the view that had the allegation been true, it would have been very good that they had visited.

oh i commented on her blog page.

Its not been deleted yet but i have had a gob full from a couple of her fans.

They are just as deluded as she is.

It is astounding how many totally unfounded allegations there are but Sw just find faults just to give them something to do

i just err on the side of caution madame lindt!

Gigantaur - what did you say on her blog?

my commenst are still there

my intials are MB

Aww, I want to see the blog! Too nosey for my own good.

i shant link but it is - me, the man and the baby.

the entry in question is called "yesterday"

I've read the comments. Mostly good points, gigantaur, but I was taken aback by this;
"Unfortunately we do not have CCtv in every home. We have to rely on the reports of the public and other professionals to let us know if there is a cause for concern."

Unfortunately?!?

Thanks.

conrflower - the unfortunately was slightly tongue in cheek.

Some people seem to assume that we should just know via telepathy or something that a child is being abused.

bugger, better report that post

there were so many references to the lovely lady's name on that blog I have typed it out again

post reported, sorry all x

I missed the original thread but just had a quick look at her blog.

I must say, given that we live in a society where one is innocent until proven guilty, the idea that SS can turn up unannounced, accompanied by the police, on the basis of an accusation, but without any evidence and expect to be invited in to conduct an appraisal of someone's home?

What is the law's stance on this sort of unwarranted intrusion, does anyone know?

If there is evidence of a crime, then investigate. But a poisonous email surely cannot entitle SS to enforce such an intrusion on one's privacy? I really want to know the law in such cases.

I feel very sorry for her, and rather disgusted with the actions of SS, if her account is accurate.

gigantaur, what would you do if a family refused you entry as you were investigating an accusation?

Presumably you need actual evidence to pursue further?

People have a right to privacy, and to live their lives how they wish within the confines of the law. We are not duty bound to assist SS with their investigations unless the law compels us to do so.

Perhaps I'm being naive and we actually now live in a society where SS feel they should have automatic access to every area of everyone's lives, as they see fit. I just wonder if this is in keeping with the law, or a general impression.

VLC...I don't actually believe her account of what happened

and never did on the original thread about it, either

if the initial email suggested that the child may have been in immediate harm then that is why the police were there. They could force entry. Someone said they needed a warrant. As far as i know ( i dont work within childprotection so not my area of expertise) they would only need a warrant to search the home.

It is not standard procedure for a SW to be accompanied by a police officer.

Yes they do need evidence in order to persue the complaint but with a child that is not yet at school where exactly is that evidence going to come from if not hte home?

Surely it would have to be a very big deal for ss and police to turn up on a Sunday.

I can well imagine some blog readers or even visitors to her home having some worries after reading the stuff she posted about leaving wires trailing everywhere among other stuff.

You can tell she lives her live online anyway I love reading blogs but that one came across as a massive cry for attention she wanted to be a victim it was all very malodramatic.

Anyfucker - me neither.

I am sure there was a comment made about ensuring the baby gate was secured properly if it wasn't fixed up as that in itself would be more dangerous than not having one at all.

And the chest of drawers comment was probably just an attempt to be friendly.

if these commenst were made at all.

The bedroom would have to be in very bad shape for a SW to comment on it. I have walked into really disgusting houses and they don't even factor onto the radar as although it isn't how i want to live, so long as it proves no danger or health risk it isn't our business.

I now work in family outreach so i go visiting the families that ned help but fall beyond SS remit.
This lady is precisely the sor of person i would be assigned to.

I've only read her account on her blog, so don't really know what else to go on.

I feel strongly that the law should protect families from intrusion. Yes, SS may have their work cut out for them, but that is how it should be. I believe the police are not able to enter someone's home to have a little looksee on the basis of a tip off, without the householder's permission, and I thought the law was pretty stringent about the circumstances in which a warrant would be granted.

I don't feel I would want my life offered up for scrutiny by the 'authorities' even if that makes their job easier. Nor would I welcome 'advice' on my personal housekeeping or safety standards of my (occasionally immaculate, occasionally messy) home.

I'm kind of surprised that you feel it would be appropriate to be assigned to someone who had no need or desire to have anything to do with you, gigantaur!

If the social worker felt the need to comment on the state of her home then i can assure you that it will have been a tad more than "just messy"

of course the blogger is not going to tell the world that now is she?

There is no way on this planet there can ever be a legislation to make it more difficult for authorities to check on a childs welfare.

SS do not have the right of entry without a court order or accompanying police officer. AS i say, the legalities of when a po can enter are beyond my ecpertise but i am fairly sure they can enter if they have good cause.

You would be amazed at how many people have minimal input from SS, mostly just a bit of advice and yet go round telling the world how they are disgusted at the intrusion, of course there was nothing wrong. how very dare they.

Do you really bellieve that a SW with a case load that would require her to work a minimum 60 hour week simply to touch base with each of them will go and add to her workload just to stick her nose where it is not needed?
They are glad to visit houses and just sign them of as needing NFA. they don't want or need the extra work i can assure you

agree, gigantaur, that many social workers are not actively aiming to increase their workload.

However, one has the right to decline to even hear your unsolicited advice, no?

they do.
But i think i would be suspicious of someone trying to prevent me from meeting a child i have had reports is being beaten and abused.

Whilst it is your right to refuse entry, similarly to yor right to remain silent meanign that the police/cps/jury can make assumptions because of that silence, SW will undoubtedly draw conclusions from your reluctance to allow them to resolve a "false" accusation quickly and efficiantly.

I am sure if you are on the recieving end of a malicious report you will be both shocked and upset, but it really is in the best interests of all concerned to allow the SW to do her job without delay.